Author Affiliations: Nursing Department (Dr Cho) and Graduate School (Mr Kim), Inha University, Incheon; and Graduate School of Information & Telecommunications, Konkuk University (Prof Park), Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Comput Inform Nurs. 2021 Aug 19;40(2):95-103. doi: 10.1097/CIN.0000000000000819.
Advances in bibliometrics and co-citation analysis provide the opportunity to analyze quantitatively the large amount of nursing research used in evidence-based nursing. Numerous nursing researchers have attempted to obtain evidence that using evidence-based nursing improves the quality of nursing practices. However, little is known about how these efforts comply with the rigorous methods required for a systematic review in a subject area. This study explored the comprehensiveness of systematic reviews in four guidelines for preventing inpatient falls using bibliometrics and a co-citation network technique. Citations (n = 659) and 9417 unique bibliographic records written by 6537 authors were collected from the guidelines in January 2020. The results showed none of the references spanned all four authoring bodies, whereas only 0.1% and 4.7% of the references spanned three and two of the authoring bodies, respectively. The co-citation analysis revealed differences in the scope and primary concerns among the development groups, even in the same setting, with differences in the highly influential articles and authors. These findings imply that although the systematic reviews of guidelines on fall prevention were of good quality, there remain areas for improvement in terms of harmonizing the selection of bibliographic citations comprehensively.
文献计量学和共被引分析的进展为分析循证护理中大量使用的护理研究提供了机会。许多护理研究人员试图获得使用循证护理提高护理实践质量的证据。然而,对于如何使这些努力符合系统评价在主题领域所需的严格方法,人们知之甚少。本研究使用文献计量学和共被引网络技术,探讨了四项预防住院患者跌倒指南中系统评价的全面性。从指南中于 2020 年 1 月收集了 659 篇引文(n=659)和 9417 条唯一的书目记录,这些记录由 6537 位作者撰写。结果表明,没有一个参考文献涵盖了所有四个作者机构,而只有 0.1%和 4.7%的参考文献分别涵盖了三个和两个作者机构。共被引分析揭示了发展群体之间在范围和主要关注点上的差异,即使在同一环境中也是如此,在高影响力文章和作者方面也存在差异。这些发现表明,尽管预防跌倒指南的系统评价质量良好,但在全面协调书目引文选择方面仍有改进的余地。